Review: Sabrent Rocket Q 1TB NVMe SSD M.2

by Hilbert Hagedoorn on: 06/09/2020 10:14 AM | source: | 19 comment(s)

We review the Sabrent Rocket Q 1TB, a fast M.2 SSD that you can purchase for 129 USD these days. Labeled with Reads and Writes in the 3200/2000 MB/s ranges there however is an oddity to be found with this series, as that Q in the naming implies a substantial difference. Wanna know what that is?

Read the review right here.

Related Stories

Review: ASUS ROG STRIX XG279Q Gaming monitor - 06/05/2020 12:36 PM
In this article, we will test the ASUS ROG STRIX XG279Q. This is a 27-inch 2560 x 1440 screen, IPS based with a 170 Hz refresh rate. Oh yes, and some RGB lighting as well as offering FreeSync and GSyn...

Review: MSI MEG Z490 UNIFY - 06/03/2020 10:50 AM
In this review, we look at the MSI Z490 UNIFY. The new series targeted in a high-end solution. Interesting to see that this is an RGB-less all-black design. Priced at 299 USD, it comes with AX WIFI an...

Review: Sabrent Rocket NVMe 4.0 1TB NVMe SSD - 06/02/2020 02:39 PM
Priced at 20 cents per GB (199 USD/EUR) we review the Sabrent Rocket NVMe 4.0 NVMe M.2 SSD Will this Sabrent offer mostly selling on Amazon be fast enough to keep up with the PCIe Gen4 competition? Re...

Review: Gigabyte Z490 VISION G - 05/29/2020 03:11 PM
In this review we look at the Gigabyte Z490 VISION G. The new series is aimed to become the more affordable solution at 199 USD, it might not have AX WIFI, but still has that Intel 2.5 Gbps ethernet j...

Review: Lamptron HM101 External Stat Panel - 05/27/2020 10:44 AM
Lamptron is trying to find its new niche. They’re a company known mainly for their fan controllers – something that’s seldom used anymore, because most motherboards have fan headers now, and t...

4 pages 1 2 3 4

geogan
Senior Member

Posts: 1190
Joined: 2010-01-04

#5799287 Posted on: 06/13/2020 09:35 PM

the 15 second would be true if the computers had the ability to directly access the from cpu to ssd or gpu ... but alas things do not work like that there is a lot of io your files have to pass threw from your SSD to be usable by a game so after some point on the gaming side you get diminishing returns, kind of why there is such a big deal around the ps5 ssd ... where there is a custom soc that does the decompression on the spot and skip most of the io allowing the gpu and cpu to have much more direct access to ssd .The speeds are there video editing transferring files etc you will see em ... just the games are a whole other beast .

I got exactly the same score in PCMark 10 for an ancient cheap SATA SSD and the supposed latest, greatest, NVME PCI-E Gen4 drive... I get similar results in PCMark 8 for all tests.

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/pcm10b/843964/pcm10b/851751#

NiColaoS
Senior Member

Posts: 686
Joined: 2011-01-17

#5801211 Posted on: 06/19/2020 01:53 PM

Damn, sorry for the off topic, but first time I just got 2 Samsung 970 EVO Plus and didn't know they are too high on that speed list. I'm an early SSD adopter and since the days of Samsung SATA SSD 830, 840, 850 and lastly had 3x 860s. Blindly only Samsungs I get.

To be honest responsiveness you don't notice difference, but when you load a game, there you feel it. I forgot how time-consuming was to load a game.

P.S. The only kind of bad news is that just read Samsung will release 980 EVO. I read that story just a day before I got my SSDs. Well, C'est la vie.

Loophole35
Senior Member

Posts: 9797
Joined: 2011-09-21

#5801214 Posted on: 06/19/2020 01:58 PM

I don't agree with those maths. I have 3 HDD 8TB full of steam games, which usually update, once a day or a week. If I fill a 1TB SSD with those games using a SSD QLC with 700- 1000 endurance. and I play a game on daily bases and save it every 5min over the same file, I would be able to update that file 700 times (remember SSD is full so the only way is to update the file rather than place it in other part of the SDD). The disk will last 175 days playing 8h a day. Great investment $129 per less than a half a year

Been using a 1TB 600p NVMe as a game drive for over two years and it's TBW is lower than my OS drive. Game drives do not take as much abuse as you seem to think.

0blivious
Senior Member

Posts: 3299
Joined: 2006-04-25

#5801336 Posted on: 06/19/2020 08:24 PM

Loophole35
Senior Member

Posts: 9797
Joined: 2011-09-21

#5801427 Posted on: 06/20/2020 01:51 AM

RE: TBW:

(current drives in system)

4 years: 29 of 150 TBW used:
My 500GB Samsung 850 Evo SSD has a TBW of 150. This drive has seen heavy use as my OS drive (and big games) for over 4 years (49 months, 17 days, to be exact). I have currently used 29.1 TBW in total. At that rate, I have 12+ years to go.

1+ year: 9 of 400 TBW used:
My 2TB nvme ssd drive (Intel 660p) has a TBW of 400. This drive has been used as my Games drive for 1 year, 53 days. I have currently used 8.6 TBW in total. At that rate, I have about 57 years to go.

Additionally, I'm about to retire that Evo 850 drive from heavy service. This weekend it will go in a secondary rig. All of my SSDs have been like that. Obsolete because of size, long before TBW even gets on the radar. Not one of them have ever died either.
I had to tell the same thing basically to Fox a while back. The misconception of how much abuse our SSD’s are subjected to is ridiculous. I just upgraded my 600p 1TB to a Sabrent Rocket 3 2TB. It’s faster than my 960 EVO I use for OS. I’m gonna be switching to AM4 soon because I’m tired of new vulnerabilities every month on my Intel system and I think Zen3 is gonna be the real deal so the 960EVO will be getting updated to a Gen4 M.2 soon.

4 pages 1 2 3 4

Post New Comment

Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.